A randomized trial of resin-based restorations in class I and class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 24-month results
- PMID: 19188412
- DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0129
A randomized trial of resin-based restorations in class I and class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 24-month results
Abstract
Purpose: The authors conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the survival rate of esthetic restorations in Class I and Class II beveled preparations in primary molars 24 months after placement. The null hypothesis was that there is no difference among survival rates of the restorative materials used.
Methods: Forty-eight children (mean age, 5 years 9 months) received 141 restorations in beveled cavosurface margins in primary molars randomly assigned by lottery method: 46 received treatment with Vitremer Tri-Cure Glass Ionomer System (3M ESPE Dental Products, St. Paul, Minn.) (33 Class I and 13 Class II restorations), 51 received treatment with Freedom (SDI, Bayswater, Victoria, Australia) (36 Class I and 15 Class II restorations); 44 received treatment with TPH Spectrum (Dentsply, Petropolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) (30 Class I and 14 Class II restorations). Two examiners whose technique had been calibrated (weight kappa > 0.85) evaluated the restorations using modified U.S. Public Health Service criteria and Visible Plaque Index score at baseline and at 12, 18 and 24 months.
Results: After two years, the authors censored data for 17 restorations, considered 101 restorations to be clinically successful and deemed 23 restorations failed because of loss of marginal integrity, anatomical form discrepancies and secondary caries. For Class I and Class II restorations, the cumulative survival rates were higher than 80 percent and 55 percent, respectively, for all materials (life table, Gehan-Wilcoxon Test, P > .05; P > .05).
Conclusions: At the 24-month clinical recall, the authors found no differences among materials in Class I (P > .05) or Class II beveled preparations (P > .05) in primary molars, but all materials showed higher survival rates in Class I than in Class II restorations.
Similar articles
-
Randomised trial of resin-based restorations in Class I and Class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 48-month results.J Dent. 2010 Jun;38(6):451-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.02.004. Epub 2010 Feb 25. J Dent. 2010. PMID: 20188783 Clinical Trial.
-
Split mouth randomized controlled clinical trial of beveled cavity preparations in primary molars: an 18-Month follow up.J Dent. 2008 Sep;36(9):754-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.05.006. Epub 2008 Jun 25. J Dent. 2008. PMID: 18579283 Clinical Trial.
-
Conventional versus resin-modified glass-ionomer cement for Class II restorations in primary molars. A 3-year clinical study.Int J Paediatr Dent. 2003 Jan;13(1):2-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-263x.2003.00416.x. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2003. PMID: 12542617 Clinical Trial.
-
Clinical performance of glass ionomer cement and composite resin in Class II restorations in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Dent. 2018 Jun;73:1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.04.004. Epub 2018 Apr 9. J Dent. 2018. PMID: 29649506
-
Quality and Survival of Direct Light-Activated Composite Resin Restorations in Posterior Teeth: A 5- to 20-Year Retrospective Longitudinal Study.J Prosthodont. 2019 Jan;28(1):e195-e203. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12630. Epub 2017 May 17. J Prosthodont. 2019. PMID: 28513897 Review.
Cited by
-
Caries management strategies for primary molars: 1-yr randomized control trial results.J Dent Res. 2014 Nov;93(11):1062-9. doi: 10.1177/0022034514550717. Epub 2014 Sep 12. J Dent Res. 2014. PMID: 25216660 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical